Class 185 a good train?

[61653 HTAFC]

They have the same engines as 180s and Voyagers, so very similar performance.
Good at hill-climbing and comfortable but I find the layout rather messy - not as many good seats as you expect.
I personally think the 175/180 layout and seats are better.
If you travel in both 350s (not /2s) and 185s, while there are many similarities, you soon realise the 350s are much quieter and more refined.

Apologies as it's been done to death on here, but whilst the door layout on 158s/175s/180s might well be preferable for longer limited-stop journeys, if the TPE units had this layout Leeds to Manchester would end up with delays mounting up by the end of the morning peak due to increased dwell times.

Also, it's no surprise that 350s are quieter as they don't have a large diesel engine bolted under your seat... Comparing like with like though, and the 185s do seem to do better in the noise department!

 

[northwichcat]

Apologies as it's been done to death on here, but whilst the door layout on 158s/175s/180s might well be preferable for longer limited-stop journeys, if the TPE units had this layout Leeds to Manchester would end up with delays mounting up by the end of the morning peak due to increased dwell times.

I'm not really sure that is the case. If you look at the 06:22 Liverpool to Scarborough service that service is scheduled to be stopped at each of Piccadilly, Stalybridge and Dewsbury for 2 minutes, at Leeds for 3 minutes and at Huddersfield for 4 minutes.

When people are talking about the next franchise they are saying things like loco-hauled 442s can't replace 185s on Liverpool to Newcastle because of the end doors, ignoring the fact that a 442 has 10 sets of end doors, while a 185 has 6 sets of middle doors.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I'm not really sure that is the case. If you look at the 06:22 Liverpool to Scarborough service that service is scheduled to be stopped at each of Piccadilly, Stalybridge and Dewsbury for 2 minutes, at Leeds for 3 minutes and at Huddersfield for 4 minutes.

When people are talking about the next franchise they are saying things like loco-hauled 442s can't replace 185s on Liverpool to Newcastle because of the end doors, ignoring the fact that a 442 has 10 sets of end doors, while a 185 has 6 sets of middle doors.

Exactly. The number of 185s isn't going to increase, and any other diesel rolling stock that will be freed up in the same approximate time frame is needed to replace Pacers and increase capacity on local and rural routes. If you're trying to timetable TP North then your job is much easier if you've got 7 car end-doored AT300s where passengers aren't crush-loaded rather than 3 car 185s with the ideal door layout but where passengers can't get on or off since there are so many of them in such a short train.

 

[47271]

I've travelled on them a lot over the years, both on the cross Pennine routes and on the Manchester Airport to Edinburgh and Glasgow services.

I agree with most of what's been said already, and that most of their problems result from overcrowding rather than anything within the design itself.

That said, they were never really suitable for a sustained high speed run to Scotland - for me more to do with space than noise or ambience, I find the Standard seats too small and upright to work in after an hour or so surrounded by other passengers. Whenever I knew that I needed to do this I always hunted around well ahead for a decently priced First Class advance, which made the journey a lot more pleasant. The 350s are a big improvement for the Scottish routes, if for no other reason than they have more seats. They always seem to be rammed full now as well whenever I travel however.

I've always been intrigued by the unique rising and falling, almost surging, engine sound heard from the outside when the train is standing still. You don't really notice it when you're aboard and it doesn't happen in motion. Can anyone tell me what causes this?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good train generally. Too short, though, should have been 4 or even 5 car, and the First Class should have been at the outer end either side of a door like the 321s, giving two nice private compartments where there is no need to walk through. Overpowered - could have had a trailer car or smaller engines.

 

[47271]

Good train generally. Too short, though, should have been 4 or even 5 car, and the First Class should have been at the outer end either side of a door like the 321s, giving two nice private compartments where there is no need to walk through. Overpowered - could have had a trailer car or smaller engines.

This is very much a personal preference thing here, but one of the reasons that I'd never waste money on First Class on Scotrail is because the tiny compartments lurch around over the wheels at the carriage ends of the 170s. I also get along a lot better working at Standard table seats on Scotrail than on 185s. You get a nice smooth ride at the centre in First the 185s. I agree that people trailing to the toilet is tiresome, but I'd rather be in the middle.

I'm not saying that's right for everybody, it's just me!

 

[matchmaker]

Good train generally. Too short, though, should have been 4 or even 5 car, and the First Class should have been at the outer end either side of a door like the 321s, giving two nice private compartments where there is no need to walk through. Overpowered - could have had a trailer car or smaller engines.

They're overpowered for a reason, though - to cope with hilly routes.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not really sure that is the case. If you look at the 06:22 Liverpool to Scarborough service that service is scheduled to be stopped at each of Piccadilly, Stalybridge and Dewsbury for 2 minutes, at Leeds for 3 minutes and at Huddersfield for 4 minutes.

When people are talking about the next franchise they are saying things like loco-hauled 442s can't replace 185s on Liverpool to Newcastle because of the end doors, ignoring the fact that a 442 has 10 sets of end doors, while a 185 has 6 sets of middle doors.

Each of those doors are wider though, and the mid-vehicle vestibules are better for standing than the cramped ends of 158s or 442s. Also with mk3s/442s passengers boarding can really only turn one way, towards the centre of the carriage, and it's also harder to see if everyone's got off when you're waiting to board.
I could see the 442 solution working if they were restricted to only the fastest services through the core (Newcastles or Airports) but I'd guess that would cause issues for diagramming as I assume they interwork to some degree. Putting them on the less-congested South TPE services would be more sensible, if they're the only way of boosting capacity.

 

[fowler9]

I'm not a multiple unit fan but it is what we are stuck with and the 185's are pretty good, if only they were longer or there were more of them, but that is not a design fault. The first class section is really nice and normally empty when I use them.

 

[E_Reeves]

I think the class 185 has won a best DMU of the year award before? TPE is definitely one of the better first group companies.

 

[northwichcat]

Each of those doors are wider though, and the mid-vehicle vestibules are better for standing than the cramped ends of 158s or 442s. Also with mk3s/442s passengers boarding can really only turn one way, towards the centre of the carriage, and it's also harder to see if everyone's got off when you're waiting to board.

The 442 door design wouldn't meet latest standards so if new trains were procured with end doors they would be much wider.

If the 442s are used they have up to 350 seats. It's likely Liverpool to Newcastle will be half-hourly from December 2017 so we could be talking about around 700 seats an hour instead of around 200. How bad is the overcrowding if you think people will need to stand after the introduction of 500 additional seats an hour?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The 442 door design wouldn't meet latest standards so if new trains were procured with end doors they would be much wider.

If the 442s are used they have up to 350 seats. It's likely Liverpool to Newcastle will be half-hourly from December 2017 so we could be talking about around 700 seats an hour instead of around 200. How bad is the overcrowding if you think people will need to stand after the introduction of 500 additional seats an hour?

Based on my own experience, if there were enough 185 vehicles for EVERY service to be 6-cars long there'd still be some standing in the peaks. 442s with 68s could be a short term solution but as I said, better used on South TPE services with the released 185s boosting capacity via Huddersfield.

 

[northwichcat]

Based on my own experience, if there were enough 185 vehicles for EVERY service to be 6-cars long there'd still be some standing in the peaks. 442s with 68s could be a short term solution but as I said, better used on South TPE services with the released 185s boosting capacity via Huddersfield.

Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes takes the same time as Liverpool to Newcastle and some of those services get as crowded between Manchester and Sheffield as North TPE services do between Manchester and Leeds.

If we follow your idea of replacing 185s on South TPE with 442s then that will release enough 185s to run the additional Liverpool to Newcastle service, with no additional capacity on existing services.

Or if we put 442s on the enhanced Liverpool to Newcastle service that will release 6 or 7 x 185s to strengthen other TPE services.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes takes the same time as Liverpool to Newcastle and some of those services get as crowded between Manchester and Sheffield as North TPE services do between Manchester and Leeds.

If we follow your idea of replacing 185s on South TPE with 442s then that will release enough 185s to run the additional Liverpool to Newcastle service, with no additional capacity on existing services.

Or if we put 442s on the enhanced Liverpool to Newcastle service that will release 6 or 7 x 185s to strengthen other TPE services.

My reasoning for putting the 442s on Hope Valley rather than Standedge is simply because the extended dwell will have less of a negative impact on a route with 2 fast trains an hour than it will on one with 5, soon to be 6. But I'm not a train planner so I could be missing something.

 

[northwichcat]

My reasoning for putting the 442s on Hope Valley rather than Standedge is simply because the extended dwell will have less of a negative impact on a route with 2 fast trains an hour than it will on one with 5, soon to be 6. But I'm not a train planner so I could be missing something.

While the new TPE service will be express, two of the existing services will be slowed down to allow withdrawal of stopping services between Manchester and Huddersfield and between Huddersfield and Leeds, so they'll be no extra services just no terminating services at Huddersfield.

Between 07:30 and 08:29 there are 15 services which go through Deighton, 5 are booked as 75mph DMUs and 10 as 100mph DMUs.

Through Chinley there are 10 paths booked in the same period but 4 of them are for long freight trains, mainly pathed for 75mph running but one is pathed for 60mph running. Then you've got the Northern stoppers (75mph DMUs), EMT services (90mph 158s) and TPE services (100mph 185s but limited to 75mph on that section due to being too heavy to run at Sprinter speeds.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The PIS system has one of the most irritating voices ever.

Yes, I find it sounds rude and clipped. Entirely in keeping with the rest of the operation.

A softer, more polite-sounding Northern accent would have done better, though wouldn't beat the old Scouse lift at Liverpool Central! (Long gone)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The 442 door design wouldn't meet latest standards so if new trains were procured with end doors they would be much wider.

The 444 is a good example of modern (mostly) end doored stock. The doors are about 1.5 leaves of 350/185 door wide.

 

[DarloRich]

I was wondering, never having travelled on them, what the general consensus is on the 185

Real people like them but spotters whine on about the 185 for some reason. They are a very good train.

Yes, I think this understates the point many people are making. Basically a good train, or better than 150s, 153s & 156s, but unfit for purpose on busy regional and intercity routes.

It is essentially only a 2 car suburban unit as far as standard class is concerned after taking into account first class and disabled access etc.

The high power rating is not normally used by TPE as they try to operate them for fuel economy, coasting along to slack timings at least on TPE North.

They would be good for routes like Manchester-Buxton or the Calder Valley line but even then might be overcrowded at peak times unless run in multiple.

My view is that they should convert the first class saloon to standard and redeploy them as soon as alternative stock can be found for TPE.

Typical spotter wibble I am afraid. The 185 is a very good, solid, reliable, fast, powerful and cheap to operate (maintenance wise) modern unit which offers good capacity for many of the routes they are used on. Despite all the tosh about engines they seem a very quiet train and in my mind the best of the newer designs.

They are comfortable and well liked by real people. And this is what matters here. REAL people (not spotters or enthuisats) like them. There are plugs at each table, plenty of space in the airline seat sand the seats seem to line up with the windows. The first class section seems adequate enough and its located at the end of the train which is much more sensible than having it in the middle like the LM 350's do. They are also worked intensively and have helped to offer a much more frequent and higher quality service on TPE which in turn has helped to attract even more passengers. What they aren't is long enough or plentiful enough.

The over crowding is bad on the Leeds - Manchester peak (TPE N) section although off peak on a York or Hull starter is a pretty pleasant traveling environment. Anglo - Scottish services can be very busy at times and the lack of extra units is really felt here and on TPE (N). TPE (S) wise Doncaster/Sheffield - Manchester is very busy at peak times but not so bad off peak.

I now mainly use TPE (N) and find that Newcastles,Boro's or Scarboros tend to be rammed at all times of the day. However there are more double ups happening which really helps on the busy Leeds - Manchester section at peak times but not enough to remove the problems into and out of Leeds and Manchester

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is very much a personal preference thing here, but one of the reasons that I'd never waste money on First Class on Scotrail is because the tiny compartments lurch around over the wheels at the carriage ends of the 170s. I also get along a lot better working at Standard table seats on Scotrail than on 185s. You get a nice smooth ride at the centre in First the 185s. I agree that people trailing to the toilet is tiresome, but I'd rather be in the middle.

I'm not saying that's right for everybody, it's just me!

I had a very enjoyable ride in the single seat in a Scotrail 170 yesterday. Much better than the 185, though I would put all of the First Class at one end either side of a dedicated door.

The big problem I have with the 185 layout is that people *don't* go through so Standard standing space and toilet availability is wasted.

 

[fowler9]

I had a very enjoyable ride in the single seat in a Scotrail 170 yesterday. Much better than the 185, though I would put all of the First Class at one end either side of a dedicated door.

The big problem I have with the 185 layout is that people *don't* go through so Standard standing space and toilet availability is wasted.

This is a good point. A decent number of people see the first class sign and don't go near that coach. This is however good for me. I don't think they are really good for an Inter City service but FTPE isn't really run as an Inter City service in what I would say is the traditional sense of the term.

As a rail enthusiast I would rather see another production run of 37's and 50's pulling Mark 2's but that isn't going to happen and wouldn't really work. Ha ha. The Desiros are decent trains as modern units go.

 

[northwichcat]

Typical spotter wibble I am afraid. The 185 is a very good, solid, reliable, fast, powerful and cheap to operate (maintenance wise) modern unit which offers good capacity for many of the routes they are used on. Despite all the tosh about engines they seem a very quiet train and in my mind the best of the newer designs.

So you're criticising someone else who maybe has made one slightly questionable point but then make numerous very questionable points in your own statement.

Fast? They are limited to 100mph and could run faster on Newcastle and Scottish services if the units had a higher top speed. Scottish services did have 110mph paths prior to the introduction of Desiros on the route. While they are slightly faster than 158s the heavier weight means they have to run at slower speeds on certain sections meaning there's no time advantage in using 185s over 158s on certain routes.

Offers good capacity? Maybe they're OK North of York but for the core sections of the TPE network 3 carriages is grossly less than what is required.

Cheap to operate? I see you add (maintenance wise) afterwards. Just as well considering how much diesel they wasted before eco-mode was introduced and considering how much First TPE have to pay in track access for their heavy trains. I seem to recall TPE saying something like eco-mode will save enough diesel in 1 year to fuel the 9 x 170s for 3 years! Normally track access charges are higher for faster trains yet TPE pay more per carriage for their 100mph 185s than XC pay for their 125mph 220s.

Quiet? With the eco-mode they can be quiet for passengers on board but if you're ever in the rural countryside they pass through, they make a lot of noise compared to 158s.

I wasn't even thinking they are that bad when I first saw this thread. However, after seeing your inaccurate overselling of them you've convinced me they aren't as good as I thought.

 

[DarloRich]

So you're criticising someone else who maybe has made one slightly questionable point but then make numerous very questionable points in your own statement.

Fast? They are limited to 100mph and could run faster on Newcastle and Scottish services if the units had a higher top speed. Scottish services did have 110mph paths prior to the introduction of Desiros on the route. While they are slightly faster than 158s the heavier weight means they have to run at slower speeds on certain sections meaning there's no time advantage in using 185s over 158s on certain routes.

Offers good capacity? Maybe they're OK North of York but for the core sections of the TPE network 3 carriages is grossly less than what is required.

Cheap to operate? I see you add (maintenance wise) afterwards. Just as well considering how much diesel they wasted before eco-mode was introduced and considering how much First TPE have to pay in track access for their heavy trains. I seem to recall TPE saying something like eco-mode will save enough diesel in 1 year to fuel the 9 x 170s for 3 years! Normally track access charges are higher for faster trains yet TPE pay more per carriage for their 100mph 185s than XC pay for their 125mph 220s.

Quiet? With the eco-mode they can be quiet for passengers on board but if you're ever in the rural countryside they pass through, they make a lot of noise compared to 158s.

I wasn't even thinking they are that bad when I first saw this thread. However, after seeing your inaccurate overselling of them you've convinced me they aren't as good as I thought.

Whatever. If you bothered to read what i wrote you would note I said that the trains aren't long enough or plentiful enough, that they are very overcrowded in the peaks (although no worse than on an LM desiro out of Euston) and that they are quiet inside. However real people, not spotters/enthuisats like us, like the trains. They are popular and have contributed to the increase in numbers travelling on the route. However, the need for more peak time carriages should be obvious to all.

It is interesting that you don't comment on the intensive nature with which these trains are worked (much more than the 158's they replaced) or the cheapness of the required maintenance even considering such intensive workings. The fact they are very reliable helps with this no end.

As a regular user i have no problems with the 185, the obvious capacity failings aside. Off peak on the right train (as i said York and Hull starters are much quieter) they are very pleasant and perfectly fine as both long distance regional trains and shorter distance commuter transport. But you overlooked that....

yes they are heavy and take a lot of fuel to operate and that is not fantastic. If the line was electrified things would be much better...........

PS the last time i looked 100mph is faster than the top speed of the 158. What is that exactly?

PPS which sections are the 158's limited to low speeds by their weight?

 

[bramling]

I was wondering, never having travelled on them, what the general consensus is on the 185

I realise they are chronically overcrowded and they couldn't have more coaches inserted for reasons I fail to remember..

Recognising that problem which also plagues the voyagers I'd rather talk about the train itself

I remember when they came out there was a lot of praise about all the tables and window seat alignment... Am I correct in thinking they have an abnormally high number of tables? Perhaps this is a regret given how busy I understand they are!

How noisy are they?
Has the interior lasted well?
Are the automated announcements excessive?
Is first class adequate and in the right area?
Do they have a guards compartment ala south west trains?
Does the door alignment cause draughts?
How would you improve the train?
Are they better than the 158?

Thanks- believe they are soon to be ten years old

Reading through the thread, I'd generally agree with what others have said. They're not a bad train all in all, however not enough were built, and/or they're not long enough -- and never were from day one.

They do have a slightly strange layout (I understand there are reasons for this), and actually I find the window spacing and seat alignment is strange too. Compared to a Turbostar, or even something like a class 165/166, they're a step down in this respect -- although not badly so. The interior also seems to contain quite a bit of wasted space for one reason or another, compared to a class 158.

I'd have preferred the class 185 to have been a diesel version of the class 365, complete with 4x20m carriages (maybe one vehicle could be unpowered?) and a similar internal layout, perhaps with a bit of luggage space built in. 8-car trains would then be viable at busy times, with plenty of seating and standing capacity.

Whilst I don't mind the class 185, for some reason I prefer the class 170.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst I don't mind the class 185, for some reason I prefer the class 170.

Apart from the poorly sized luggage racks, which could be fixed quite easily, I agree. The 170 just feels that bit homelier and more comfortable.

 

[DarloRich]

Apart from the poorly sized luggage racks, which could be fixed quite easily, I agree. The 170 just feels that bit homelier and more comfortable.

really - do you not find them nosier and more rattley than the 185?

 

[northwichcat]

Whatever. If you bothered to read what i wrote you would note I said:

....

PS the last time i looked 100mph is faster than the top speed of the 158. What is that exactly?

PPS which sections are the 158's limited to low speeds by their weight?

I notice you edited your post after I started writing a reply. Also you're saying I didn't read your post but are making the reverse argument of my post. I'm saying the 185s are limited to speeds like 75mph where 158s can run at 90mph due to the 185s being heavier - Hope Valley and Selby to Hull are the two examples I know where that is the case.

Real people, not spotter like the trains.

I frequently hear people saying Northern trains aren't as good as TPE ones, so I'll agree that people like the 185s built in 2006 more than the Pacers and Sprinters built between 1984 and 1989. However, I do also hear people advising others to avoid TPE because the train will be rammed.

They are popular and have contributed to the increase in numbers travelling on the route.

I'm afraid over recent years we can't link increased passenger numbers to the newer trains. In the last 10 years Northern have manged 100% growth on some lines with 1980s stock, so more people are using the train whatever runs the service not just the services with new trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

really - do you not find them nosier and more rattley than the 185?

I'll give you rattly, the German build quality is better on the 185. But the 170 rides better (350s ride appallingly as well, but the good track quality on the south WCML prevents this being an issue) and I find is actually less noisy, particularly the aircon but also the engines.

 

[DarloRich]

I notice you edited your post after I started writing a reply. Also you're saying I didn't read your post but are making the reverse argument of my post. I'm saying the 185s are limited to speeds like 75mph where 158s can run at 90mph due to the 185s being heavier - Hope Valley and Selby to Hull are the two examples I know where that is the case.

yet they run to the same timetable overall so it cant be such a handicap. Admittedly the core TPE (N) route is slow. Frustratingly so at times!

I frequently hear people saying Northern trains aren't as good as TPE ones, so I'll agree that people like the 185s built in 2006 more than the Pacers and Sprinters built between 1984 and 1989. However, I do also hear people advising others to avoid TPE because the train will be rammed.

Peak time Manchester to Leeds / York is bad. Very bad at times and the trains aren't long enough. The 350/4's allow some double ups which really help but there aren't enough to go around

I'm afraid over recent years we can't link increased passenger numbers to the newer trains. In the last 10 years Northern have manged 100% growth on some lines with 1980s stock, so more people are using the train whatever runs the service not just the services with new trains.

Indeed but new trains will always help project an image of success. The enhanced timetable, which is popular, is almost entirely facilitated by the new trains.

 

[northwichcat]

yet they run to the same timetable overall so it cant be such a handicap.

It's not a handicap but the 100mph speed doesn't bring any real benefits on those routes due to the heavier train.

The enhanced timetable, which is popular, is almost entirely facilitated by the new trains.

Which enhancement are you talking about? The introduction of the 5th service on North TPE is too recent to be included in the latest ORR stats, while the Scottish service enhancements have been done using 350s. I thought this thread was about 185s not Desiros or TPE in general.

 

[DarloRich]

Which enhancement are you talking about? The introduction of the 5th service on North TPE is too recent to be included in the latest ORR stats, while the Scottish service enhancements have been done using 350s. I thought this thread was about 185s not Desiros or TPE in general.

The true TPE timetable has changed considerably since the days of Northern Spirit and within the 10 years since the 185 came into service.

 

[northwichcat]

The true TPE timetable has changed considerably since the days of Northern Spirit and within the 10 years since the 185 came into service.

Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes has been an hourly service for a very long time.

It's a more consistent timetable but I think if anything there had been reductions for core TPE (prior to the 5tph on North TPE.)

The number of overnight services has been reduced.

A more consistent timetable has been introduced on North TPE. In ATN days you had something like:
14:00 Liverpool-Sunderland
15:00 Liverpool-Sunderland
16:00 Liverpool-Hull
17:00 Liverpool-Sunderland
18:00 Liverpool-Scarborough

No real consistency and of course Sunderland was dropped as a TPE destination. Beverley also used to get some TPE services but was also dropped. (First TPE were awarded a franchise which required them to run a more consistent timetable.)